ADvindicate celebrates its one-year anniversary as website traffic increases

Time has whirled by, and it’s hard to believe a whole year has passed since ADvindicate launched Feb. 2, 2012. God has blessed beyond expectations. Due to its staff and guest contributors, ADvindicate published 172 articles with a monthly readership average in the last six months of almost 6,000.

News stories have played the most significant role in doubling ADvindicate’s traffic the last six months. It published 54 news stories of which 33 percent were original. Plans are in place to double its journalistic efforts, so be on the lookout for more news.

People from 162 countries/territories visit ADvindicate. While the United States far exceeds any other country/territory for traffic, ADvindicate still receives a significant number of hits from Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, South Africa and the Philippines. Its top five cities are Los Angeles, San Francisco, Loma Linda, New York City and Riverside. The top two referral sites are Facebook and Spectrum Magazine.

The staff at ADvindicate pray its readers have been blessed. ADvindicate started from an idea to see bible-based Seventh Day Adventist views promoted, but it's still relatively small in the world of independent Adventist websites, so thank you to the thousands who continue to share ADvindicate’s content via email, Facebook or word of mouth.

Statistics are based on Google Analytics

Having faith in God while waiting

“Wait on the LORD: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, on the LORD.” – Psalm 27:14 Wait on the Lord. Waiting is one of life's most difficult challenges. Impatience is a common thread in the history of humanity, and in today's fast-paced society addicted to instant gratification, waiting even just a little bit has become agonizing. We often grow tired of waiting and either give up whatever it was we were waiting for or try various other methods to achieve the result we wanted.

This mindset can leak into our spiritual life, and impatience in spiritual matters can pose a threat to our faith and trust in the Lord. The longer we wait, the greater the opportunity for our courage and conviction to waver. The human heart, after all, is a frail thing.

There are some among us who are waiting on the Lord to work in our life. It could be guidance with which college to attend, what degree to pursue, what career to enter, or what man or woman to marry. It could be help with broken relationships, health problems, financial issues. During the wait, we may struggle with a wide range of high and low feelings, such as confidence in the Lord and discouragement when He seems to be quiet. We know from the Scriptures that the Lord hears us when we pray to Him. In Isaiah 65:24, the Lord promises: "...before they [His people] call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear." We know this, of course we know, but there are times when our weak humanity overwhelms us and we feel lost, alone.

Waiting is hard, even for the Christian.

So what do we do? Do we give up? Give in? God forbid!

Waiting is never easy, but there is always a reason. Even though we cannot see it while we are in the present, the Lord knows exactly what we need and when. If we look back over those times in our lives where we thought the Lord was not answering our prayers, when the waiting seemed to be unbearable, we are able to see the Lord's hand guiding us through. That alone should give us courage to push onward and endure any future waits.

However, if you struggling right now, perhaps you will find comfort in knowing that you are not alone. Whatever it is you are going through, others have experienced it and, through the strength of the Lord, overcame the agonizing wait (Philippians 4:13). Some testimonies have been recorded in the Scriptures. In 1 Corinthians 10:11, we are told: "Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

For those waiting for a life-changing event, remember that exiled Israel had to wait 70 years for the fulfillment of the Lord's promise through the project Jeremiah to bring them out of exile. (Jeremiah 29:10-13)

For those waiting for the right marriage partner, Isaac was forty-years-old when he married Rebekah according to Genesis 25:20.

For those waiting for a child or struggling with infertility, Sarah, Hannah, the mother, of Samson, and Elisabeth all endured the agony of infertility before the Lord blessed them with a child. And according to 2 Samuel 6:23, Michal, the first wife of David, never had children.

Whatever it is that you are waiting on the Lord for – no matter how long it seems that silence is your only answer, no matter how dark your current situation may seem – hold fast to the promise of Romans 8:28.

Real quickly I want to diverge onto a tangent, and this is very important. There are three things that we, humans, tend to do that make waiting worse: worry, coveting, and running ahead of God.

Let's look at the first: worry. Worry has a way of getting inside our minds and taking root very deeply. Some individuals, for whatever reason, are more pre-disposed to anxiety than others, and anxiety often has more than just psychological effects. Some people experience physical pain associated with high anxiety. Worry, anxiety, is not healthy physically, emotionally, or spiritually. It causes us to chronically view life from a negative perspective, overlooking all the blessings by focusing in on only the bad things. If left unchecked, this anxiety can damage our relationship with the Lord as well as our relationships with others. The apostle Paul wrote to the believers in Philippi with these encouraging words: “Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God” (Philippians 4:6).

The second, covetousness, is similar. Covetousness often begins with a harmless, passing thought, perhaps along the lines of: "I wish I had a good job like that." or "Why not me?" It settles into our hearts and minds and pumps out poison into our lives. Without realizing it, we grow dissatisfied with what the Lord has done for us and greedily long for the blessings the Lord has bestowed on others. James 1:14-15 gives us insight into how this transformation occurs in the heart and mind. “But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” Like worry, this discontent will weaken our faith and trust in the Lord.

The third way we tend to worsen our situation is by running ahead of the Lord. After waiting a certain amount of time, our impatience leads us to doubt the Lord or come to the faulty conclude that the Lord must be waiting for us to act first. It is just like that saying, which is often erroneously attributed to the Bible but actually originating from ancient Greece, “God helps those who help themselves.” We use human logic and reasoning to talk ourselves into doing something that is not guided by the Holy Spirit. The end result often only complicates the situation. For example, after waiting for years and years with no apparent answer from the Lord, Abraham and Sarah tried to bring about the Lord’s promise of a child themselves: Abraham took Sarah’s handmaiden Hagar as a second wife. The history of God’s people was complicated by the misunderstandings and hatred that sprung up between the descendants of the son of promise, Isaac, and the son of man’s way, Ishmael. Proverbs 3:5 tells us clearly “Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding” and Proverbs 14:12 warns: “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

So how do we strengthen our faith and deepen our trust in the Lord while we are waiting?

I believe the key to this is coming to understand that even though we may be waiting for the Lord in whatever situation of our life (family, career, health, whatever it may be), we cannot be idle. The apostles, in the upper room, were waiting on the Lord but while they waited, they were not idle. They put away their differences, selfish desires, earnestly drawing together and pouring our their hearts to the Lord in prayer. And the result? The Holy Spirit fell upon those waiting and many were reached for the cause of Christ.

Even though we may be waiting on the Lord, we need to have faith that He has a plan for our lives. We need to keep our faith in the Lord on fire NOW through studying God’s Word, praying, fellowshipping with believers, witnessing to those within our sphere of influence, and living every single day for the glory of the Lord.

Remember, it is the little moments that happen every day that often make the biggest difference. We often wait for the Lord to give us a grand mission—a call to ministry, an opening as a missionary to a far-off place, whatever the dream may be—and while He may do that, He also expects us to live every day in faith. That includes sharing the Gospel in any capacity that we are able to in the "short term". We have an individual personal responsibility to witness for Christ NOW, not tomorrow or in ten years.

Think of it this way: the Lord has placed you in this exact time and place for a reason, even if you cannot see it. In Acts of the Apostles on page 109, Ellen White spoke of "a large class [of people] who need to be taught by such missionaries as Philip—men who will hear the voice of God and go where He sends them. There are many who are reading the Scriptures who cannot understand their true import. All over the world men and women are looking wistfully to heaven. Prayers and tears and inquiries go up from souls longing for light, for grace, for the Holy Spirit. Many are on the verge of the kingdom, waiting only to be gathered in."

The first priority in our life should always be sharing the message of Christ with those in our sphere of influence: our family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, and community. Let nothing else, not even what we may be waiting for, get in the way of this prime directive. In the end, having a career, marriage, children, etc. will mean absolutely nothing if we did not use what the Lord blessed us with to win souls to Christ. And what a glorious message we have to share! No other branch of Christendom has been given the privilege, and responsibility, of sharing the first, second, and third angels' messages.

In Evangelism, page 119, we read: "In a special sense Seventh-day Adventists have been set in the world as watchmen and light-bearers. To them has been entrusted the last warning for a perishing world. On them is shining wonderful light from the Word of God. They have been given a work of the most solemn import,—the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels’ messages. There is no other work of so great importance. They are to allow nothing else to absorb their attention."

And in Christian Service on page 145, we are told: "Let every Seventh-day Adventist ask himself, “What can I do to proclaim the third angel’s message?” Christ came to this world to give this message to His servant to give to the churches. It is to be proclaimed to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. How are we to give it?"

Even though we may be waiting on the Lord to move in our own lives—whether it is help with finances or health issues, concerns for wayward children, which person we should marry, or what job to take, we cannot forsake our duty to share the good news of Jesus with those around us today, right now.

A different kind of dinosaur

Back in 2006, my company completed a spray-foam insulation project for Indianapolis Allison, a large GM plant in the heart of the city. The weather was good, and the project was eventually completed. I have to be honest. I have not seen so many lazy people in one city block as I did at that plant. And I blame the labor union mindset for that diminished work ethic. As we move into the year 2013, I sense that the time is right to ask ourselves, “Do Adventist Christians have any business joining labor unions?”

The first head of the American Federation of Labor Samuel Gompers, summed it up nicely in 1886 when asked what organized labor really wanted, he replied, “More.” There is more, and we are going to unmask it in this article.

Trade unions rose to prominence at a time when industrialized countries were growing at a staggering rate. In those days employee safety was often secondary to profits and job security was mostly non-existent. That was the 1840’s. Organized unions were a necessary provisional corrective to the exploitations of early industrial-revolution business. Then, as the industrialized nations matured, working conditions along with ingenuity, production safety, and efficiency all improved. By the 1920’s the industrial climate typified by Henry Ford and Herbert Hoover reached an apogee, buttressed by endemic optimism, efficient government and a profound confidence in the future. May I remind you that today’s situation has made labor unions a wholly unnecessary dinosaur standing in the shadow of a great federal regulatory beast? Unless workers are held at gunpoint, it is not possible to "exploit" them for any length of time today.

Here’s irony. Today’s progressives find fault with the church for clinging to “outdated” morals and beliefs (as if Biblical belief could ever be outdated). In liberal circles it is vogue to mock the church as clinging to a faded image etched onto a Victorian daguerreotype.

This is why it is interesting to watch so-called "Progressives" tout 19th century solutions for 21st century problems. Liberals in the church who support labor unions (and there are a growing number of them) are themselves museum curators cultivating the relics of antiquity. Labor unions are modern dinosaurs that should by now be extinct. They were needed at the turn of the 20th century to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, but they survive today as a political tool to influence elections and exert economic power. However, another (and far more sinister) goal is "increased forced unionization.” They want everybody to be like them!

It is not surprising unionized companies like GM, Chrysler, and Bethlehem Steel went bankrupt, and that heavily unionized states like California, New York, and Illinois are in deep financial trouble. By their very nature, unions must seek to drive their employers into bankruptcy. If they don't, then they aren't doing their job. Too harsh you say? Not at all.

The purpose of a union is to extract from its employer more than the market wage. If it doesn't do this, then there is no reason for workers to support it or to pay dues to it. And because companies must sell their output at market prices and pay market returns for the capital that they employ, they cannot afford to pay more than "market" for any major input. Accordingly, any unionized company for which labor is a significant part of its cost structure will eventually be destroyed. Thus, I can sum up the labor union mindset as trying to take more out of the system than they can put back into it.

As mentioned earlier, unless workers are held at gunpoint, it is not possible to "exploit" them for any length of time. That is why labor unions have become a modern dinosaur. In my opinion, they ought to go away. They once served a purpose but that time has long since passed. They have turned into very powerful, self-serving organizations that are hurting America and our ability to compete with the rest of the world. Yet I don’t think they are going away. Here’s why, "The trades unions will be one of the agencies that will bring upon this earth a time of trouble such as has not been since the world began" (LDE 116).

Whoa. With these startling words, the Spirit of Prophecy pulls back the curtain of the future. This is what’s coming. I told you there was more.

Could it really be that these “harmless” trade unions, many of which began in the 1840’s could become a ferocious monster in the time of the end? Absolutely. A fitting emblem of the “lamb that speaks like a dragon” is these organizations that began with decent intentions, and end with the fiery outbreath of persecution.

“But can’t we join one anyway and ignore these old outdated warnings?” You can, yes. At great peril.

“I need to provide for my family, and God wants us to be happy right?” No. The Lord wants us to be faithful. As we are faithful to His ways, joy comes into our lives. “If you know these things, happy are you if you do them” (John 13:17).

Those who claim to be the children of God are in no case to bind up with the labor unions that are formed or that shall be formed. This the Lord forbids. Cannot those who study the prophecies see and understand what is before us? The transgressors of the law of God have taken sides with their Leader, the General of rebellion. He understands how to devise his Satanic schemes and through whom to work for the carrying out of them. He is striving to lead every soul to take sides with him, and under the influence of his temptations, thousands are binding themselves up in bundles, ready to be consumed by the fires of the last day. 4MR 78

Samuel Gomper said it. Interviewed in 1886, his answer to the question “What do you labor unions want?” was “More!” Ok. Now let’s look back at the results of another interview in the Heavenly Country above. In the God-to-Isaiah transmission of truth all the unholy desires of Lucifer–-as he mutated into Satan–-are easily summed up in this one word “More!” (Isaiah 14:12-17). He wanted to take more out of the system then he was able to put back. This wrong spirit introduces friction into the universe and ultimately leads to violence (John 8:44). That explains why labor unions tend towards violence so easily.

The work of the people of God is to prepare for the events of the future, which will soon come upon them with blinding force. In the world gigantic monopolies will be formed. Men will bind themselves together in unions that will wrap them in the folds of the enemy. A few men will combine to grasp all the means to be obtained in certain lines of business. Trades unions will be formed, and those who refuse to join these unions will be marked men. 2SM 142

So what do you think? Is it ok for Adventist believers to join labor/trade unions?

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship has righteousness with unrighteousness? and what ‘union’ has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14).

We’ve been warned.

Science affirms Daniel's diet lowers cancer risk

I knock gently on my patient’s door and hesitantly walk in. After the initial exchange of greetings I carefully state, “Ms. Doe, I have some bad news. The pathology report indicates cancer….” News such as this is every physician’s and patient’s nightmare. To this day, disclosing the “C” (cancer) word both as a physician and as a human being fills me with fear. But is this fear completely founded?

Many of us view the “C” word as a result of hereditary genes, as though we were handed a set of genes by our parents and there is nothing we can do about it. But is that really the case? While it is true that heredity plays a large role in disease, the good news is that new advances in scientific research indicate that we don’t have to be quite so scared hereditary genes as we used to think. Furthermore, this same research indicates that we can not only prevent the big “C” but, in many cases, even treat it with simple dietary changes and moderate exercise. Excitingly, science was not the first to discover these revolutionary principles. God as our Great Physician and Creator advised us of these same principles long ago, both in the Bible and in the Spirit of Prophecy. In our television show Practical Living and in our health lectures, we focus on all eight of God’s perfect health plan. However in the following article, we will primarily focus on nutrition.

The scientific community has for some time noted the benefits of a vegetarian diet in cancer prevention. In fact, in 2012 the largest meta-analysis of multiple different studies indicated over an 18 percent decrease in cancer among vegetarians as opposed to non-vegetarians.(3) With all the positive benefits on cancer prevention noted from a vegetarian diet, many have wondered what role in cancer prevention and treatment a completely plant based or vegan diet plays. This was the basis of the recent National Cancer Institute funded study performed and published by Loma Linda University. In the Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2), the researchers studied over 60,000 people. Controlling for confounders such as smoking, alcohol use and a family medical history of cancer, the researchers discovered that while vegetarian diets do confer a protective role against cancer, veganism confers the greatest decrease in cancer at a 34 percent decrease in cancer from a vegetarian diet alone. This improved cancer protection was noted in both genders but very specifically in prostate cancer and female related cancer including breast, ovarian and cervical cancers.(7)

In response to the AHS-2, many are asking, “Why such a significant decrease in cancer among vegans versus vegetarians?” The answer to this question is the basis of the research performed by Pritikin researchers, a group of concerned scientists and physicians dedicated to discovering the relationship of disease and diet. Their first attempt to answer this question involved taking petri dishes with prostate cancer cells, the “number one” cancer in men, and exposing them to the blood of vegans versus those on a standard American diet. The petri dishes were followed over the course of a year, noting cancer cell growth and programmed cell death or apoptosis. Much to the excitement of the researchers, the prostate cancer cells were significantly affected by both, by a decrease in growth and increased programmed cell death. In fact, the leading researcher Dr. Ornish and his group discovered that a vegan diet decreased cancer growth by nearly 8 times over the standard American Diet.(5) Although these results were phenomenonal, the Pritikin researchers wanted to determine if this same effect could be substantiated over an even shorter time interval and with the most common cancer in women, breast cancer. As such, they took three different breast cancer cell lines including estrogen and progesterone receptor resistant ductal carcinoma, one of the more difficult to treat breast cancers, and exposed them to the blood of non-vegan women. Then, these same participants were then asked and agreed to undergo a two week vegan diet. After only 12 days, the petri dishes were assessed and amazingly there were significant decreases in cancer cell growth and exponential increases in apoptosis (programmed cell death). Imagine that! In just 12 days, one’s blood can be completely altered on a healthy, plant based diet so much so that the body is able to fight off cancer. The exciting news is that this same 10-day interval effect can be seen in numerous other diseases as well.

Pritikin researchers sought to determine what element in the vegan women’s blood was combating the cancer cells. In 2011, the researchers published their results that demonstrated clearly that the hormone involved is Insulin like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1). For some time, IGF-1 has been known to promote cancer cell growth and decrease programmed cell death, both clearly substantiated in the article published by Soliman et.al.(2) Combining their research with that of Ngo’s article (4), the Pritikin researchers were able to show that a vegan diet lowered IGF-1 levels even as low as half their Average American omnivore diet level.(4,6) In addition, the researchers discovered that eating a vegan diet not only lowers your current risk of cancer but it also combats years of meat-eating by lowering IGF-1 binding globulin which lowers “old” accumulated IGF-1. This is accomplished by assisting the liver in “binding” up cancer causing IGF-1 and eliminating it through the gastrointestinal tract. Through these two mechanisms, the researchers determined that your body is able to drastically fight cancer in as little as 12 days.

The really good news about combating cancer with a plant based diet is that there are no side effects. In addition, according to numerous studies, the results of a plant-based or vegan diet are far reaching and don’t just decrease your risk of cancer, but help you prevent, treat and defeat diabetes, hypertension, obesity and other health problems. In future articles, we will be examining each of these diseases individually and noting the benefits of a plant based healthy diet among other lifestyle changes. In contrast, research is very clear that meat eating decreases longevity by worsening many of these diseases. Although an improvement to a meat diet, a lacto-oval diet is also not ideal and does not carry the best health results as noted with a vegan or completely plant based diet. According to a recent report by the CDC Nurses’ Health Study, eating the equivalent of one egg per day shortened a females life as much as smoking five cigarettes per day for 15 years.(1) This statistic concerning a lacto-oval diet suggests there is a good, better, and best diet. And, if you are looking for the lowest risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, hypertension and many, many other diseases, the best is the original healthy plant based diet given in Eden (Genesis 1:29).

The vast and quickly realized benefits of a plant-based vegan diet remind me of the dietary blessings of this same diet as noted in Daniel Chapter 1. Here, Daniel was given 10 days of a plant based diet. At the end of his “10 day Daniel diet trial,” he was rewarded with appearing healthier than all his other omnivore colleagues (Daniel 1:11,15). These results were found exponential, when, at the end of three years of eating a plant based diet, he and his friends were found to be 10 times smarter, and l would postulate based on the above research, 10 times healthier and with perhaps 10 times less risk of cancer, than all of his counterparts (Daniel 1:19,20).

The above exciting research shows that in as little as 12 days--and I would dare to state 10 days--a plant based diet is 8 to 10 times more effective in decreasing our risk of cancer when compared with the average American diet. This knowledge has motivated me to ask my patients to give me 10 days of a plant based vegan diet. Stressing the positive results of improved cholesterol, weight loss and glucose control, and now, more exciting than ever, a decrease in cancer, I will fuel my patients incentive to "try the Daniel diet." Perhaps if you haven’t yet tried the Daniel 10 Day Diet, you too will test it out and I guarantee you won’t be dissatisfied.

REFERENCES:

1). Baer, HJ., et.al. American Journal of Epidemiology. 11 Feb 1;173(3):319-29. Epub 2010 Dec 6. Risk Factors for Mortality in the Nurses' Health Study: a Competing Risks Analysis.

2). Barnard, RJ., et.al. Journal of Nutrition and Cancer. 2006;55(1):28-34. Effects of a Low-Fat, High-Fiber Diet and Exercise Program on Breast Cancer Risk Factors in vivo and Tumor Cell Growth and Apoptosis in vitro.

3). Huang T., et.al. Annuals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 2012; 60;233-240. Cardiovascular Disease Mortality and Cancer Incidence in Vegetarians; A Metanalysis and Systemic Review. 4). Ngo, Th., et.al., Journal of Cancer Causes and Control. 2002 Dec;13(10):929-35. Effect of Diet and Exercise on Serum Insulin, IGF-I, and IGFBP-1 Levels and Growth of LNCaP Cells in vitro (United States.

5). Ornish, D, et.al., Journal of Urology. 2005 Sep;174(3):1065-9; discussion 1069-70. Intensive Lifestyle Changes May Affect the Progression of Prostate Cancer.

6). Soliman, S., et.al. Journal of Evidence Based Complement and Alternative Medicine. 2011; Epub 2011 Mar 15. Analyzing Serum-Stimulated Prostate Cancer Cell Lines After Low-Fat, High-Fiber Diet and Exercise Intervention.

7). Tantamango-Bartley, Y., et.al. Journal of Cancer Epidemiological Biomarkers and Preventation. 2012, Nov 20, Vegetarian Diets and the Incidence of Cancer in a Low-Risk Population.

La Sierra releases statement on Diaz and bylaw changes

La Sierra University was contacted the day ADvindicate published "La Sierra University hires new evolutionary biologist," but was unavailable for comment until today. Their full statement is posted below:

For Immediate Release Larry Becker Executive Director, University Relations lbecker@lasierra.edu 1-­‐1-­‐1

La Sierra University Responds to False Charges on Independent Websites

Educatetruth.com and ADvindicate.com have focused their efforts on damaging the reputation of Dr. Raul Diaz, who joined the La Sierra University biology faculty at the beginning of January.

Initially one of these sites used an unnamed source to accuse Dr. Diaz of being an atheist. When that was proven false, the site changed its conjecture to Dr. Diaz being agnostic. In fact, Dr. Diaz is a baptized member of the Seventh­‐day Adventist Church. He has attended various Adventist churches throughout the span of his academic career.

Dr. Diaz is also quoted by these sites as saying he is an “evolutionary biologist.” Using this as an attack shows a lack of understanding of contemporary biology. An “evolutionary biologist” does focused analysis of the diversity of life, the genetic variations of living organisms, and how organisms interact with their environment. Through this important work, these scientists make possible advances in human health and medicine, agriculture, and the environment.

Dr. Diaz is a dedicated and talented young scientist who is seeking to discover what causes human facial and hand malformations through his research. His passion for his subject has already shone through to students in the three weeks he has been on campus. He looks forward to using his bio-­‐medical research to develop classes for students with a pre­‐professional health focus. His field and laboratory research efforts will also benefit those students planning to seek graduate biology education.

EducateTruth.com has also been attempting to short­‐circuit the board’s efforts to revise the university’s bylaws in response to WASC’s and AAA’s concerns regarding governance issues. The Bylaws Committee members have worked many hours educating themselves so that they fully understand the issues. Their efforts have resulted in a set of recommended bylaws changes for the university constituents to act on during a special constituency meeting on February 21.

These recommendations are not designed to remove the university from Church control, as claimed by some. The proposals leave that defining relationship strong and unchanged, while addressing WASC’s stated concern about potential conflict of interest at the board leadership level. This is a unique situation, because the Pacific Union Conference is the only union in the North America Division where the union president chairs two college boards—Pacific Union College and La Sierra University.

A key recommendation from the Bylaws Committee is that the board chair be elected and be one of the four Pacific Union officers who serve as ex officio board members, rather than automatically being the union president. This allows the board to select its own chair, while ensuring that the chair will always be a union officer. The only limitation imposed through the proposal is that neither the board chair or vice chair of La Sierra University’s board may concurrently serve as chair or vice chair of another university or college board.

There is no change to the ex officio membership of the board, which will continue to have among its members the Pacific Union Conference president, secretary, treasurer, vice president, director of education, and the presidents of the Arizona, Southeastern California, and Southern California Conferences. The revised bylaws make no change to the constituent membership, and the constituency retains all existing control over lay appointments to the board and any amendments to the bylaws.

The board, according to the proposed bylaws, will continue to focus on setting policies that keep the university closely aligned with the mission, goals, and objectives of the Adventist Church.

#-­‐#-­‐#

Report on first meeting of the Theology of Ordination Study Committee

The most important Adventist Bible study conference in more than 30 years got underway last week. The Theology of Ordination Study Committee (TOSC) held its initial meeting January 15th through the 17th, as committee members from all over the world converged on a hotel in Maryland. It was widely felt that this study would be the most noteworthy such convocation since Glacier View in 1980, and might be remembered as being of similar significance to the 1888 General Conference Session. TOSC was conceived of after a delegate to the 2010 General Conference Session suggested that the church conduct a comprehensive study of ordination. GC President Elder Ted Wilson took the idea for a comprehensive study group to the GC Administrative Committee in September, 2011, and the idea was approved. TOSC will meet three more times, four times in all, with the objective of reaching consensus on a theology of ordination and as to whether women may properly be ordained to the gospel ministry. The study will be concluded in the summer of 2014, and a report provided to the GC Executive Committee for review at Annual Council in the autumn of 2014. The Annual Council will then decide on any items to be referred for action to the 2015 General Conference Session.

What did not happen with TOSC is more newsworthy than anything that has happened thus far: There was no attempt to bias the outcome of the committee's study by packing its membership. It appears that the membership is roughly equally divided between those in favor of and those opposed to female ordination. Moreover, the most articulate advocates on each side have been included. Prominent Adventist preachers in favor of (Dwight Nelson, Randy Roberts) and opposed to (Doug Batchelor, Stephen Bohr) female ordination are on the committee. Prominent Adventist scholars and theologians in favor of (Richard Davidson, Angel Rodriguez, Jan Barna, Darius Jankiewicz) and opposed to (P. Gerard Damsteegt, C. Raymond Holmes) female ordination are on the committee. There are female pastors who have already been ordained (Chris Oberg, Kendra Haloviak Valentine) as well as accomplished lay women (Kathryn Proffitt, former telecom executive and U.S. ambassador to Malta; Doris Gothard, former General Motors executive and lay church leader; Carol Zarska, founder of an independent ministry on the sanctuary). A complete list of committee members can be found here.

Not only does the larger committee strongly reflect both points of view, the smaller executive or steering committee also seems to be about equally divided: Davidson and Rodriguez are in favor of female ordination and Damsteegt and Fagal are opposed. Those tapped to present papers at the initial meeting also appeared to be about equally split. The committee is expected to pray and study its way to a consensus without a human thumb on the scales predetermining the outcome.

All this is in marked contrast to the procedure followed by the two rebellious unions last summer. They enlisted their tithe-supported union news magazines to argue in favor of female ordination, without presenting any contrary viewpoints. Then, at the special constituency meetings, only the arguments in favor of female ordination were presented. (Elder Wilson was allowed to speak at both meetings, but his comments were limited to church unity and order; he did not speak to the merits of female ordination.) I am told that the rabbit was put in the hat with regard to delegate selection, as well. After such a carefully choreographed process, the outcome of the votes was never in doubt.

In view of the two unions' one-sided procedure, and their rudeness toward Elder Wilson (the infamous “point of order” interruption), I would have followed the same procedure, to the opposite purpose: pack the committee with those opposed to female ordination, present only the anti-female ordination side of the issue, force a vote, and then present the results to Annual Council and the 2015 General Conference Session. But Ted Wilson is a better man than I am. If he was ever tempted to implement such a cynical strategy, he did not act upon the temptation. To the contrary, he wants and expects a full and fair hearing of the issue, with the strongest advocates on both sides involved in the process. He recognizes that the church must work through this issue with Bible study and fervent prayer. That he is able to put aside personal views, and even personal slights, and act only in the best interest of the Seventh-day Adventist Church impresses me that he is God's chosen leader for this time. I have immense respect for him.

Back to TOSC's initial meeting last week. Each day began with a devotional and a season of prayer. There were about six opportunities for prayer each day; typically, we prayed in groups of two or three, followed by a closing prayer from a microphone. The first day's devotional was presented by Mark Finley, who told a deeply moving story about forgiveness in the wake of the Rwandan massacres of 1994. Elder Wilson gave us our commission, and committee chair Artur Stele outlined the procedure we would be following. The steering committee decided to devote the first meeting to preliminary issues, such as hermeneutics, and the study of ordination itself, without regard to whether women can be ordained or to what offices.

The first paper was titled, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues in the Church: Proposals for Ground Rules,” by Paul Ratsara and Richard Davidson. There was an opportunity for comments from the floor after each paper was presented. After lunch, William Fagal, who has perhaps the most beautiful speaking voice I've ever heard, presented a paper on, “The Proper Role of Ellen G. White's Writings in Resolving Church Controversies.” Next, Mario Veloso presented a paper titled, “Hermeneutic—A case of Biblical Understanding.” This paper was not in finished form, and seemed redundant in light of the 1986 Rio Document, the Seventh-day Adventist Church's approved statement of its scriptural hermeneutic.

Dr. George Reid, who was at the Biblical Research Institute in 1986 and was involved in drafting the Rio Document, answered questions about it. The final paper of the first day was, “Ellen G. White on Bible Hermeneutics,” presented by Dr. Damsteegt.

Day two began with a devotional by Kendra Haloviak Valentine, who teaches New Testament at La Sierra University. With the preliminaries regarding basic hermeneutics and Bible-study methods out of the way, the committee turned to the question of ordination itself. David Trim, the outstanding historian of Seventh-day Adventism, presented a paper on “Ordination in Seventh-day Adventist History.” He pointed out that this conference is the first time that we, as a church, have ever considered the theology of ordination. Darius Jankiewicz presented a paper titled, “The Problem of Ordination: Lessons from Early Christian History,” which showed that, within a couple of centuries of the apostles, ordination had become synonymous with authority to administer the sacraments, and in later Catholic practice came to convey irrevocable spiritual infallibility. Dr. Damsteegt then presented a paper on “The Magisterial Reformers [Luther and Calvin] on Ordination.”

After lunch, Angel Rodriguez presented a paper titled, “Towards a Theology of Ordination,” around which, it was hoped, the committee could form a consensus. Many wanted to comment on this paper, and it was eventually decided, after much fervent prayer and several suggestions regarding a way forward, to divide into five discussion groups of roughly 20 people each. This was done, and the sub-committees met and discussed suggestions as to how the consensus document could be improved. This took up the remainder of the day.

The third and final day of the conference began with a devotional by Joel Musvosvi, followed by more prayer, after which each group presented its suggestions as to how the consensus paper could be improved. Dr. Rodriguez had taken a minimalistic approach to the selection of Scripture passages for inclusion, limiting himself to those passages discussing the laying on of hands; hence, a common suggestion of the discussion groups was to broaden the paper to include Bible passages relating to setting apart to, and qualifications for, religious offices, regardless whether such passages mention the laying on of hands. There were quite a few other suggestions. The paper was to be revised after a prayerful review of the suggestions, and it is hoped that the committee will be able to reach consensus on a revised paper on the first day of the next meeting, which will be held this summer. Once consensus is achieved on this paper, the committee will turn to the more contentious issue of female ordination. After concluding remarks and announcements by Artur Stele and the steering committee staff, and a concluding devotional by Geoffrey Mbwana, the meeting was adjourned.

One of the most rewarding aspects of a conference of this type is the opportunity it provides to visit with other members of the committee. I was blessed to be able to visit with Dwight Nelson on the drive from the airport to the hotel, to share a meal with Doug Batchelor, and to chat with Elder Wilson about the work of the church in far flung locales such as Japan. I had a wonderful visit with Darius Jankiewicz, one of our scholars who is currently teaching at the seminary; we are the same age and crossed paths in Warsaw, Poland, in 1980, when my father's choir from Southwestern Adventist University visited that city and sang in several Adventist Churches. It was a pleasure to visit more extensively with Kevin Paulson, with whom I have often sparred online (although we agree far more than we disagree). I was also blessed to be able to visit with some dynamic Adventist lay women, including Carol Zarska, Doris Gothard, and Kathryn Proffitt. These opportunities for personal interaction are undoubtedly the nicest thing about such convocations. I am grateful beyond words for this opportunity to be enriched by association with so many thoughtful and accomplished brothers and sisters in Christ.

Note: Committee chair Artur Stele has noted that all papers presented are considered drafts subject to revision until the committee completes its work and submits its final report, after which time they will become public. He has therefore asked committee members not to disseminate the papers themselves. Since I am not at liberty to release the papers, please don't ask.

What is an apostle?

During the current discussions regarding leadership roles within the church, one area often referenced is that of an apostle.^[1] What is an apostle? what are the qualifications? Is an apostle ordained to an office, or is it an inner calling manifested in a Spiritual Gift or both? What relevance is the apostle in the church today, and is the office or gift of apostle gender specific, or inclusive? The object of this article is to come to some initial conclusions regarding this type of ministry.

Statistical Findings

The Greek word for apostle is apostolos.^[2] Apostolos is used 81 times in the N.T. It is used only once each in Matthew and Mark, six in Luke and 30 in Acts. Except for four references in Jude and Revelation, the remaining 38 references are found in Paul’s writings.

Etymology

Originally, the Greek word for apostle, apostolos, was used as an adjective.^[3] Initially it denoted the dispatch of a “fleet (or army) on a military expedition.”^[4] Later, it came to be applied to “the fleet itself and acquired the meaning of a naval expedition.”^[5] Finally, it referred to a “group of men sent out for a particular purpose, e.g., an army . . . [or a] band of colonists.”^[6] In Cynic-Stoic philosophy, it is a “technical term for commissioning and authorizing by a deity.”^[7] And in Greek culture, an apostle was known as “the champion of one religion"--missionaries for “religious propaganda.”^[8] When looking at Jewish literature, the term apostolos was “not widely used. . . [and] the term appears only twice in Josephus.”^[9]

Word Group

The broader word group of which apostolos is associated, includes the verb apostello. “The frequency of apostello reflects the importance of being commissioned.”^[10] “The noun apostole derives its meaning from apostello, and it describes the office of an apostle (apostolate), or the act of sending rather than the thing sent. In secular usage it was a noun of action used for the sending of ships, the shooting of a missile, and the sending of a mummy. It also described the sending of an expedition.”^[11]

Lexical Meanings

The meanings for apostolos in First Century Greek were:

1) One sent forth (apo, from stello- to send)^[12], ambassador^[13], delegate^[14], agent^[15], envoy^[16], any messenger^[17]-in a general sense- anyone sent^[18] (on a mission^[19], service^[20], business^[21], assignment^[22] or errand^[23]), bearer of a commission^[24], represent another person some way.^[25]

2 ) Fleet, an expedition,^[26] sea-faring and military expeditions^[27].

Interestingly, in the N.T. apostolos never means the act of sending. It “always denotes a man who is sent, and sent with full authority.”^[28] New Testament theologian Gerhard Kittel has commented that apostolos is a “commissioned representative of a congregation. . . [and] a bearer of the NT message.”^[29]

Pre-Eminent Apostle: Jesus Christ

The first mention of an apostle in the New Testament is in the life of Jesus Himself. In His final prayer, Jesus declared that the Father had “sent”^[30] Him. Throughout His life He had “manifested” the Father’s name,^[31] “glorified” Him on earth^[32] and represented Him so perfectly that when seeing Him, you saw “the Father.”^[33] Jesus was sent as an Ambassador and Delegate of the Father. He was truly the first apostle, not only in time but in primacy. In fact, Hebrews makes this clear when it describes Him as “the Apostle and High priest of our profession.”^[34] New Testament scholar Don Dent has noted that “before He sent out His own apostles, Jesus was Himself God’s apostle to the world. . . Jesus did not ask His apostles to do anything that He Himself had not already done.“^[35] Therefore, when we consider the N.T. evidence for apostolos, we start with the Pattern for all others--Jesus Christ.

PHASE ONE: The Twelve

Jesus choose twelve men from those who followed Him, and named them apostles (“whom he also named apostles“^[36]). Ellen White comments on the reason why Jesus did this, “that He might send them forth as His witnesses, to declare to the world what they had seen and heard of Him.”^[37] Later, Jesus “sent”^[38] His apostles on a missionary tour, for the purpose of proclaiming “the kingdom of God,”^[39] “healing the sick,”^[40] and “preaching the gospel.”^[41] The criteria for belonging to this elite group was:

1) They must be with Jesus to witness His ministry^[42]- “beginning from the baptism of John,” His ascension and “resurrection.”^[43]

2) They would be “sent out to preach.”^[44]

3) They were to “have power to heal the sick and cast out devils.”^[45]

The Twelve continued to intact after Pentecost^[46], but their mission shifted from being Ambassadors of Christ on earth, to the risen Christ in Heaven. The success of their mission was a result of two primary factors: first, they had been empowered by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, second, they had been direct witnesses of Jesus’ ministry and learners of His teachings. The combination of these two factors enabled them “with great power” to give “witness of the resurrection of the Lord.”^[47] The Twelve had been trained and experienced in entering new places to prepare the way for the Jesus to enter, as a result they played a critical role in leading a movement that was spreading out from Jerusalem.^[48]

PHASE TWO: Office of Apostle

After the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, the disciples were no longer in training. While Christ was with them personally, they were simply referred to as apostles. In Acts 1:25, the disciples prayed that God would show them who should take Judas’ position, that “he may take part of this ministry and apostleship (apostole). . .” (KJV). This is the first instance that the work and role of the apostles was referred to as an office or an organized function. The word “apostleship” (apostole) has three basic meanings:

1) Sending away, sending off (of troops^[49]),^[50] dispatching,^[51] expedition of ships^[52], mission,^[53] expedition^[54]

2) Discharge, dismissal,^[55] release^[56]

3) Office of Apostle,^[57] apostleship,^[58] office of Apostolate,^[59] special role of elite Ambassadorship,^[60] office of one sent,^[61] office of a special emissary.^[62]

The first two definitions of “apostole” don’t seem to fit the context of Acts 1:25, since it is referring to a collective group or company of people. In commenting on Judas’ fall, the disciples recognized that he had left their assembly (Acts 1:25- “. . . apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell“), thus the reference to an office. This office of The Twelve was a singular, non-repeatable ministry in the history of the church. Ellen White comments that “their office was the most important to which human beings had ever been called, and was second only to that of Christ Himself.”^[63] They had been commissioned by Jesus as direct witnesses of His life.  Ellen White seems to confirm this understanding when she wrote that “the twelve were called to the apostolate.”^[64]

Interestingly, when The Twelve are mentioned in the N.T., the context contains words or phrases which identifies them^[65]. When apostolos is referring to The Twelve, the following indicators confirm their identity: 1) the number twelve, 2) the specific names of the twelve (“Peter,” “John,” etc.), 3) Jesus in person, while He walked on earth, 4) the definite article preceding the word apostles ("THE Apostles"- Gr.-tous, tois, ton apostolos), and 5) the context (Acts 1:2- “He had chosen”; Acts 4:33- “witness to the resurrection”; 2 Pet. 3:2- “apostles of the Lord”, etc.). When one or any of these contextual markers are present, Scripture is signaling that the passage is only referring to this special office of the twelve apostles.

PHASE THREE: Paul and companions^[66]

The expansion of the ministry of “apostolos” is seen in the work of Paul and his companions, Barnabas and Silas. “Paul was an apostle . . . because Jesus commissioned and sent him to accomplish His purpose. His commission was divine, because Jesus chose and sent him.”^[67] “Galatians 1:1 makes it clear that Paul’s apostleship was not based on any human mediator, but was divinely authorized.”^[68] Paul uses apostolos fourteen times for himself alone.^[69]

There came a point, after Paul had been working for about one year, that both he and Barnabas were ordained as special messengers to the Gentiles. “The Holy Spirit said, ‘Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work I have called them.’ When they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away” (Acts 13:2,3). Ellen White comments on this incident, “before being sent forth as missionaries to the heathen world [they] were solemnly dedicated to God by fasting and prayer and the laying on of hands.”^[70]

Interestingly, Paul and Barnabas were called “missionaries” in this passage. This seems to be the modern equivalent of the word “apostolos." Paul references this “rite” later when he declares “I am ordained (KJV- set, put- footnote- not making a case for the meaning of ord.) a preacher and an apostle.”^[71] It was at this point that Paul considered himself an apostle. Again, Ellen White comments on this incident, “Paul regarded the occasion of his formal ordination as marking the beginning of a new and important epoch in his lifework. It was from the time of this solemn ceremony, when, just before he was to depart on his first missionary Journey . . . that he afterward dated the beginning of his apostleship in the Christian church.”^[72]

From this time onward, Paul introduces himself as an apostle,^[73] and more specifically “an apostle to the Gentiles.”^[74] His apostleship^[75] appears to be specialized and singular, just as the office of the twelve was. In an apparent paradox, he calls himself “the least of the apostles, not worthy to be called an apostle,”^[76] and yet asserts that he was “not inferior to the most eminent apostles.”^[77] He basically declared that although his role as an apostle was different than the twelve, in taking the Gospel Commission to the Gentiles,he was not inferior to them.^[78] The office of apostle (apostole) also applies to Paul and his companions. He refers to this three times in his own ministry: “we have received . . . Apostleship,”^[79] “the seal of my apostleship,”^[80] “Peter to the apostleship.”^[81]

Interestingly, Luke calls Paul and Barnabas apostles “only after they go on their first missionary journey.“^[82] It was when Paul and Barnabas were fulfilling the Great Commission that they were considered apostolos. They were on an “equal footing with the prominent apostles, but with a different sphere of ministry.”^[83]  Paul personally recruited both Silas and Timothy to join his missionary team, and their ministry functioned under his leadership (Acts 15:40-16:3). The fulfillment of the Gospel Commission through the labors of Paul, Barnabas, and his companions^[84] completed this “phase” of the role of apostolos.

First Thess. 2:6-7 refers to Paul, Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy as apostolos. The most straightforward reading is that these three men were foundational as a “planting team” bringing the gospel to this city. “Paul considered Silas and Timothy to be apostles in close association with his own apostleship. Paul considered those who worked with him preaching the gospel and establishing new churches to be apostles of Christ.”^[85]

PHASE FOUR: The Gift of Apostle

A shift in the biblical meaning of apostles took place after the initial establishment of churches. Up until this time the term apostolos was limited to those God had directly commissioned or ordained to fulfill the initial phase of the Gospel Commission. After the twelve, Paul and others had established churches, the apostolos became a spiritual gift through the agency of the Holy Spirit. It was no longer limited to the early church founders, but rather, those whom God gifted to be missionaries from the established churches. Ellen White explains:

Later in the history of the early Church, when in various parts of the world many groups of believers had been formed into churches, the organization of the church was further perfected. . . Some were endowed by the Holy Spirit with Special Gifts ‘and God has set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers . . .’ [1 Cor. 12:28 quoted]. (my emphasis)^[86]

Therefore, when the N.T. refers to the “Gift of Apostolos”- it seems to refer to the time after the initial establishment of churches had taken place (by the twelve, Paul, Barnabas, etc.), and the need for missionaries to be sent out from them was needed. Apostles have been needed in all ages and in all times since the apostolate closed in the first century. “Apostles are the first in a sequence of persons who build the church. . . [and] there is every indication that the gift was intended to be on-going.”^[87] “Apostles lay the foundation of the church. Their ministry focuses on the initial stage of church planting. This work can be strenuous and ‘dirty’ and often forgotten by those who come in later stages, but the apostle is critical in establishing the strong base and general pattern for the church within a specific geographic or ethno-linguistic boundary.”^[88] “Paul makes a careful distinction between their function as apostles and the calling as apostles of Christ to plant churches among the nations, by adding the modifier- ‘apostles OF CHRIST,’ ‘apostles OF THE CHURCHES’ or ‘apostles BEFORE ME.’”^[89]

The debate regarding the ongoing role of apostles centers around whether Paul was teaching that missionary apostles are an on-going gift (1 Cor. 12:28 and Eph. 4:11), or whether he meant the unique ministries of eyewitnesses and specifically commissioned apostles. “The context of each passage seems to imply an on-going gift. The gift list in 1 Cor. 12 is in a chapter that emphasizes the diversity of gifts; the Body of Christ is not complete without all of them. If Paul assumed that apostles were not an on-going gift to the church, it seems incongruent with the basic argument of the chapter.”^[90] The gifts mentioned in Ephesians 4:11 are given for the purpose of “equipping the saints to build up the church until we all attain to the fullness of Christ.”^[91]

New Testament scholar Harold Hoehner has stated, “apostle [in Eph. 4:11, 1 Cor. 12:28] refers to . . . the gift of apostle. There were people in addition to the original twelve who had not been with Jesus in His ministry and did not witness His resurrection but who are listed as apostles. . . It seems the main function of an apostle is to establish churches in areas that have not been reached by others.”^[92] Ephesians 4:11 teaches that the gift of Apostle is given until the Second Coming.^[93]

Apostles are the first gift, though we should understand this as a priority of sequence rather than of status. In practical terms, the other gifts are on hold until apostle has planted the new church. As a “Gift of the Spirit”--“the church does not ‘raise up’ its apostles, but responds to the apostolic witness.”^[94] Scholar David Garland notes: “Apostles appear first as the founders of the church communities.”^[95]

Conclusion

This brief survey of apostolos highlights the fact that “New Testament writers, and especially Paul, did not limit the use of apostolos to eyewitnesses. . . He viewed the apostles primarily as those who were commissioned for spreading the faith. . . And Paul’s basic concept when using the word is the missionary role of church planting.”^[96]

Apostolos has an evolving meaning in the New Testament. As was suggested, it goes through four general phases: Phase One: The Twelve- chosen by Jesus as His special witnesses of His Ministry from His baptism to His ascension; Phase Two: After Jesus ascension, their “training” had been completed, and they filled the office of the apostle. Their mission was to initiate and spread the Gospel Commission Jesus gave in Matt. 28, especially to the Jews; Phase Three: was seen in the ministry and office of Paul and his companions, in taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and planting churches throughout Asia and Asia Minor; Phase Four: represented a shift from an office to a spiritual gift. As delineated in 1 Cor. 12 and Eph. 4, the gift of apostle is gender inclusive, and based on an inner calling from God to a ministry of His choosing. “Apostles include men and women and children called and sent by God to fulfill the Great Commission through planting churches in pioneer areas.”^[97] Therefore, it is not gender or age specific, but Spirit inspired and commissioned.

Reflections

Our understanding of the on-going role of apostles has several implications for our mission work in the modern church. The following application of the New Testament “Gift of Apostles” is worth noting:

1) Present day missionaries who proclaim the gospel and plant churches where Christ is not known, fulfill the same function as missionary apostles in the New Testament. While not all overseas ministry is apostolic in this sense, missions in every generation should prioritize this foundational role of apostles.

2 ) Mission work should develop with apostles as the base because they are God’s gift to lay the foundation of the church. Mission practice that is not built on apostles will likely have an inadequate foundation.

3 ) Apostles come from the churches, but the New Testament emphasizes that churches come from apostles.

4 ) The biblical model for the partnership of established churches with the work of apostles includes commissioning and releasing those who are called by God, hearing and affirming reports of what God is doing in pioneer areas, contributing to the financial support of apostles working in foreign lands.

5 ) When we view the apostle concept in terms of a spiritual gift fulfilled in a function, rather than an ecclesiastical office- we understand that “Apostleship” is not tied to a status, but to a task.^[98]

Footnotes ^[1] Doug Batchelor, (Taken from An open letter from Doug Batchelor regarding the response to his sermon) Women’s Ordination:

A Biblical Prospective” On February 6, 2010, I presented a message to my home church in Sacramento, California. While Jesus engaged women to share the gospel, He called only men to serve in the capacity of apostle. When Judas died, his replacement was chosen from among men (Mark 3:14; Acts 1:21). This is just the beginning of the evidence.” http://www.womenministrytruth.com/portals/7/documents/An-Open-Letter-From-Pastor-Doug-Batchelor.pdf

Stephen Bohr--“Who intentionally chose 12 male apostles when there were women able in ministry that could have been chosen as well? Who chose to place the names of 12 males on the gates of the New Jerusalem and 12 males on the foundations of the city?” http://secretsunsealed.org/Downloads/newsletter2Q12web.pdf

Randy Roberts--“And Junia was identified by Paul as a leading apostle. Women filled every leadership role you can imagine.” http://session.adventistfaith.org/roberts-edited

^[2] In the textus receptus

^[3] Plat. Ep., VII, 346a; referenced in Kittel, Ibid, p. 407

^[4] Kittel, Ibid, p. 407

^[5] Kittel, Ibid, p. 407

^[6] Kittel, Ibid, p. 407

^[7] Kittel, Ibid, p. 409

^[8] Kittel, Ibid, 411

^[9] Kittel, Ibid, 411

^[10] Don Dent, The Ongoing Role of Apostles in Missions: The Forgotten Foundation, p. 31

^[11] Karl Rengstorf, “Apostello, exapostello, apostolos, pseudapostolos, apostole.” TDNT, ed. Gerhard Kittle, 1:398-446

The word appears four times in the New Testament (Acts 1:25; Rom. 1:5; 1 Cor. 9:2; Gal. 2:8)

^[12] W.E. Vine; Expository Dictionary of N.T. Words

^[13] Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the New Testament

^[14] Joseph H. Thayer; Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

^[15] S. Bagster, The Analytical Greek Lexicon

^[16] Walter Bauer, Greek-English Lexicon

^[17] Edward Robinson, Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament

E.W. Bullinger; Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek N.T. George Berry; Greek-English Lexicon

^[18] Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the New Testament

^[19] George Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament

^[20] Henry George Liddell & Robert Scott; A Greek-English Lexicon

^[21] Samuel C. Loveland; A Greek Lexicon: Adapted to the N.T.: with English Definitions

^[22] Frederick William Danker, The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

^[23] Samuel C. Loveland; A Greek Lexicon: Adapted to the N.T.: with English Definitions

^[24] S. Bagster, The Analytical Greek Lexicon

^[25] Alexander Souter; A pocket Lexicon to the Greek N.T.

^[26] George Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament

Theologian Gerhard Kittel has noted- “Only occasionally in the Gk. Field does apostolos have a meaning related or apparently related ot that which it bears in the NT. . . In the older period apostolos is one of the special terms bound up with sea-faring, and more particularly with military expeditions; it almost a technical political term in this sense.”

(Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 1, p. 407)

^[27] In the older period apostolos is one of the special terms bound up with sea-faring, and more particularly with military expeditions; it almost a technical political term in this sense. (Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 1, p. 407)

^[28]  Throughout the NT the word is used only of men, although according to the course of things women might also have been called apostles. Yet this would have been a self-contradiction, since it is a legal term and women have very restricted legal competence in Judaism. (Kittel, Ibid, p. 421)

^[29] Kittel, Ibid, 422

^[30] John 17:21,25

^[31] John 17:6

^[32] John 17:4

^[33] John 14:9

^[34] Heb. 2:18

^[35] Dent, Ibid, p. 34

^[36] Matt. 10:2

^[37] EG White, Desire of Ages, 291

^[38] Luke 9:2

^[39] Luke 9:2

^[40] Luke 9:2

^[41] Luke 9:6

^[42] Mark 3:14

^[43] Acts 1:22

^[44] Acts 3:14

^[45] Acts 3:14

^[46] Mathias replaced Judas- Acts 1:25,26

^[47] Acts 4:31

^[48] Dent, Ibid, p. 37

^[49] W. Bauer, Gr./Eng. Lexicon of the N.T.

^[50]  Abbott-Smith, Gr. Lexicon of the N.T., Thayers, Gr..Eng. Lex. Of the N.T., E.W. Bullinger, Critical  Lexicon & Concordance to the Greek N.T., Henry Liddell & Robert Scott, Greek English Lexicon

^[51] Cremer, Biblico-Theological Dict. Of Gr. N.T.

^[52]   Ed. Robinson, Gr. & Eng. Lexicon of the N.T., Frederick Danker, Concise Gk/Eng. Lex. Of the N.T.

^[53] Tyro’s Greek/English Lexicon

^[54]  S. Bagster, Analytical Gr. N.T., W. Perschbacher, New Analytical Greek Lexicon

^[55]  Abbott-Smith, Liddell & Scott, Ibid

^[56] Thayers, Ibid

^[57] Abbott-Smith, Robinson, Cremer, Perschbacher, Bullinger

^[58] Tyro, Abbott-Smith, Robinson, Cremer, Thayer, Perschbacher, Danker

^[59] Thayer, Ibid

^[60] Danker, Ibid

^[61] Bagster, Ibid

^[62] Bauer , Ibid

^[63] Desire of Ages, 291

^[64] Desire of Ages, 290

^[65]  The exception is when Paul is mentioned. The Definite article is used for him as well.

^[66] 1 Thess 1:1 identifies Paul, Silvanus and Timothy as the authors of 1 Thessalonians.

1.2. The man identified as Silvanus (Greek = Silouanos) in 1 Thess 1:1 as one of the authors of the letter is the same man known as Silas (Silas) in the Book of Acts. This is obvious from the fact that the movements of "Silvanus" in Paul's letters (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; 2 Cor 1:19; see 1 Pet 5:12) coincide with those of "Silas" in the Book of Acts (Acts 15:22, 27, 32 (34), 40; 16:19, 25, 29; 17:4, 10, 14, 15; 18:5). This man's given name was Silas, which was a Jewish name (see Josephus, War 2.520; 3.11, 20; Ant. 14.40; 18.204; Life 89-90, 272; t. Ber. 2.10); he took a similar sounding Roman name, Silvanus, presumably in order to facilitate his evangelistic work. http://www.abu.nb.ca/courses/ntintro/1thess.htm

^[67] Dent, Ibid, p. 39

^[68] Dent, Ibid, p. 39

^[69] Rom. 1:1; 11:13; 1 Cor. 1:1, 9:1,2; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:7; 2 Tim. 1:1,11; Tit. 1:1

^[70] RH 5/11/11

^[71] 1 Ti. 2:7; 2 Ti. 1:11

^[72] The Review and Herald, May 11, 1911

“Paul regarded his ordination as marking a new epoch in his life. From this time he afterward dated the beginning of his apostleship.” (Trials to Triumph, 87)

^[73]1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Ti. 1:1; 2 Ti 1:1; Tit. 1:1

^[74] Rom. 11:13

^[75] 1 Cor. 9:

^[76] 1 Cor. 15:9

^[77] 2 Cor. 11:5- “most eminent” most likely referring to the Twelve Apostles.

^[78] It was not to exalt self, but to magnify the grace of God, that Paul thus presented to those who were denying his apostleship, proof that he was “not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.” 2 Corinthians 11:5. Those who sought to belittle his calling and his work were fighting against Christ, whose grace and power were manifested through Paul. The apostle was forced, by the opposition of his enemies, to take a decided stand in maintaining his position and authority. (AA 388)

^[79] Rom. 1:5

^[80] 1 Cor. 9:2

^[81] Gal. 2:8

^[82] Acts 4:36 and 9:27

^[83] F.F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, 12

^[84] Silas and Timothy according to Col. 1:23.

^[85] Dent, Ibid, p. 53

^[86] Ellen G. White, Acts of the Apostles, p. 91, 92

^[87] Dent, Ibid, p. 64

^[88] Dent, Ibid, p. 64

^[89] Ellis, E. Earle, “Paul and his co-workers,” p. 445

^[90] Crag S. Keener, Gift and Giver, p. 105

^[91] Dent, Ibid, p. 58

^[92] Harold Hoehner, “Ephesians, An Exegetical Commentary,” p. 541

^[93] Craig S. Keener, Gift and Giver, p. 128

^[94] Anthony Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, p. 1014

^[95] David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians, p. 59

^[96] Dent, Ibid, p. 5

^[97] Dent, Ibid, p. 6

^[98] Adapted from Dent, Ibid, p. 64,65

Why Johnny won’t read the Bible: postmodernism and the decline of Christian literacy

Associate Professor of English Literature at Southwestern Adventist University Karl G. Wilcox gives a lecture at Andrews University Oct. 2012 on postmodernism and the decline of Christianity. The lecture was part of a symposium put together by the Center for Secular and Postermodern Studies (CSPS), which is a department of the Office of Adventist Mission at the General Conference. If you haven't heard of CSPS, here is its mission and general information:

Mission

To inspire, mentor, and equip Seventh-day Adventist pastors, churches and organizations to successfully lead seculars and postmoderns into a real experience with God.

General Information

CSPS exists to help the Seventh-day Adventist church better understand secular and postmodern people, explore new evangelistic methods and provide practical, relevant tools to make disciples through a real experience with God.

La Sierra University's Edward C. Allred Center honors notorious abortionist

Edward C. Allred made a fortune owning a chain of abortion clinics, personally aborting hundreds of thousands of fetuses, and currently owns gambling venues in California and New Mexico. In 2010, La Sierra University founded the “Edward C. Allred Center for Financial Literacy and Entrepreneurship" in his honor. It hardly seems possible that La Sierra University, which still purports to be a Seventh-day Adventist school, would name anything after a man who has left such a trail of wreckage in his wake, a man who made his fortune eliminating two generations of humanity, and now spends his days devising ways to separate gamblers from their money. And yet they did. But apparently they are not proud to be associated with his life work, as shown by the misleading information on their website:

Dr. Allred has always been an entrepreneur, whether in his innovative and financially successful medical practice or in his lifelong commitment to the sport and business of quarter horse racing in the United States and Southern California in particular. To both he has brought not only sound and creative business practices but also a deep interest in his colleagues and employees and a genuine care for their well being.

To characterize a business with annual revenues of $70 million from 23 outlets in two states as a “medical practice” goes beyond spin and crosses over into dissimulation.

In 1969, Dr. Edward C. Allred, a graduate of La Sierra University and Loma Linda University, founded the “Avalon-Slauson Medical Group,” which was later renamed “Family Planning Associates.” Although this was before the Supreme Court effectively legalized abortion nationwide in Roe v. Wade (1973), California had already legalized abortion in several situations, and hence many women traveled to California to have abortions. “We had planeloads of people coming in,” recalled Allred to a Los Angeles Times reporter in 2002, “We'd meet them at the airport with a bus.”

In 1980, Allred claimed to have personally aborted a quarter of a million fetuses in the preceding 12 years. It may seem difficult to believe that one man could perform so many abortions, but Allred tried to spend no more than five minutes with each pregnant woman. “We've been pioneers in so many ways,” he once told a reporter. “We streamlined, we made efficiencies, we employed the suction technique better than anyone, and we eliminated needless patient-physician contact. We usually see the patient for the first time on the operating table and then not again.” Spending only five minutes per patient would have allowed Allred to perform as many as 100 abortions in a 10-12 hour working day, and 200 working days per year (50 four-day work weeks) would, over 12 years, add up to 240,000 aborted fetuses. So Allred's estimate of the number of abortions he performed during that time is credible.

You might wonder how a person who has aborted a very large city worth of human lives salves his conscience. The pioneers of abortion, such as Margaret Sanger, were quite explicit in favoring it as a means of weeding out undesirables and the unfit, and there was general agreement that the black race was undesirable. Dr. Allred has, at least on one occasion, voiced similar thoughts.

Population control is too important to be stopped by some right-wing pro-life types. . . . The Aid to Families with Dependent Children program is the worst boondoggle ever created. When a sullen black woman of 17 or 18 can decide to have a baby and get welfare and food stamps and become a burden to all of us, it's time to stop. In parts of South Los Angeles, having babies for welfare is the only industry the people have. Edward C. Allred, M.D. quoted in Anthony Perry, "Doctor's Abortion Business is Lucrative," San Diego Union, October 12, 1980, pages A-3 and A-14.

Family Planning Associates expanded to the point where Allred owned 21 abortion clinics in California and two in Chicago. According to a 2001 article in Forbes Magazine, Allred's business generated $70 million in annual gross revenues and $5 million in annual profits. Just as McDonald's founder Ray Kroc pioneered efficiencies and economies of scale in the hamburger business, Edward C. Allred pioneered efficiencies in the abortion clinic business, causing some to call Allred “the Ray Kroc of abortions.”

But things did not always go smoothly; there have been post-abortion deaths, and Allred has been sued many times. One abortion technique Allred used in the early days was saline amniocentesis--injecting saline in place of the normal amniotic fluid--which slowly poisons the baby while burning its skin. This method was usually used in late-term abortions, and the baby typically took an hour to 90 minutes to die. In 1977, Gianna Jessen's 17-year-old mother went to Dr. Allred's Avalon Clinic in Inglewood, California, seeking to abort a pregnancy of 29 weeks (seven months). Dr. Allred used the salt poisoning method, underestimating the amount of saline necessary to kill the fetus, which began struggling to escape the deadly womb. Gianna Jessen was born alive, and Dr. Allred is listed on her birth certificate as the doctor who delivered her. Gianna suffers from cerebral palsy, which she calls the gift of cerebral palsy, and today has become a prominent spokeswoman in the pro-life movement.

Dr. Allred sold Family Planning Associates in 2005, and has retired from the abortion business. He devotes his time to a hobby and passion he acquired while still in medical school: horse racing. Dr. Allred now owns Los Alamitos Race Track in Cypress, California, and Ruidoso Downs, in New Mexico. Horse racing is a very dangerous “sport,” and the exploitation of jockeys is one of the most under reported aspects of that “sport” (really just an excuse for gambling).

Jockeys are independent contractors who earn on average about $38,000 per year; for a basic “mount fee” of as little as $60.00 per race, they risk death and paralysis. In a typical year, at least one or two jockeys are killed or suffer catastrophic spinal cord injuries, and yet the tracks do not carry adequate insurance. A paralyzed jockey will typically burn through a million dollars in medical bills in the first 2 years after the accident. This isn't a theoretical concern; on September 2, 2011, Jacky Martin suffered a broken neck in a fall at Ruidoso Downs, is now a quadriplegic, and needs mechanical help to breathe. Ruidoso downs reportedly carries only $500,000 in accident insurance, and, as in almost every case of this type, that is grossly inadequate to provide for Jacky Martin's ongoing medical needs.

These men and women risk death an catastrophic injury almost solely to provide an occasion for gambling. At Los Alamitos, the daily “handle,” or total dollar amount of bets taken in, was reported to be $1.3 million. Allred decided to simulcast Los Alamitos races to other venues, thus enabling gamblers to bet and lose money on races that they did not attend. Ruidoso Downs had been losing money, but Allred and his partners made the track profitable by adding 300 slot machines, some of which are proudly shown on the track's website. Attendance at horse racing venues has sharply declined in recent years, and industry insiders say the “sport” cannot survive without casino-style gaming at the tracks. But is saving the tracks in the public's interest? According to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC), more than one in three racetrack patrons is a pathological or problem gambler, so the tracks cause financial problems for the patrons, as well as causing jockeys to risk death and quadriplegia.

Back to La Sierra University. The Board of Directors is stocked with Adventist Church leaders. Pacific Union president Ricardo Graham is Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and all the affiliated conference presidents within the Pacific Union are also board members. These are all decent men, so it is difficult to understand how they could have allowed La Sierra to become associated with such a person as Edward C. Allred. This sad incident, along with previous stories—such as the issuing of tax-free bonds that came with a secularizing bond covenant, and the ongoing failure to prevent Darwinism being inculcated as truth—call into question whether the Board of Trustees is exercising any meaningful oversight at all.

If the church leadership in the region cannot reform La Sierra, world church leadership must take action. If La Sierra cannot be reformed, it must be clearly and publicly separated from the official church.

[AUDIO] Persecution good for the church?

Liberty magazine editor Lincoln E. Steed was a guest speaker at the Beaumont Seventh-day Adventist Church in Beaumont, Calif. His theme was perhaps it's not so bad for us to be persecuted after all. Liberty Magazine is freely circulated among legislators and individuals in positions of influence and highly respected and appreciated by people of all persuasions. Only about 10,000 Adventists, out of about one million in the North American Division, subscribe to Liberty, and according to Steed, 185,000 magazines are sent out each year.

[audio http://advindicate.com/audio/religiosliberty.mp3]

(If your current browser does not support HTML5 audio, or Flash Player is not installed, a direct download link will be displayed instead of the player.)